From: thinker.li@gmail.com
To: bpf@vger.kernel.org, ast@kernel.org, martin.lau@linux.dev,
song@kernel.org, kernel-team@meta.com, andrii@kernel.org,
drosen@google.com
Cc: sinquersw@gmail.com, kuifeng@meta.com,
Kui-Feng Lee <thinker.li@gmail.com>
Subject: [PATCH bpf-next v9 05/12] bpf: lookup struct_ops types from a given module BTF.
Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2023 13:45:12 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20231101204519.677870-6-thinker.li@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20231101204519.677870-1-thinker.li@gmail.com>
From: Kui-Feng Lee <thinker.li@gmail.com>
This is a preparation for searching for struct_ops types from a specified
module. BTF is always btf_vmlinux now. This patch passes a pointer of BTF
to bpf_struct_ops_find_value() and bpf_struct_ops_find(). Once the new
registration API of struct_ops types is used, other BTFs besides
btf_vmlinux can also be passed to them.
Signed-off-by: Kui-Feng Lee <thinker.li@gmail.com>
---
include/linux/bpf.h | 4 ++--
kernel/bpf/bpf_struct_ops.c | 11 ++++++-----
kernel/bpf/verifier.c | 2 +-
3 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
diff --git a/include/linux/bpf.h b/include/linux/bpf.h
index b55e27162df0..f0ed874d5ac3 100644
--- a/include/linux/bpf.h
+++ b/include/linux/bpf.h
@@ -1641,7 +1641,7 @@ struct bpf_struct_ops_desc {
#if defined(CONFIG_BPF_JIT) && defined(CONFIG_BPF_SYSCALL)
#define BPF_MODULE_OWNER ((void *)((0xeB9FUL << 2) + POISON_POINTER_DELTA))
-const struct bpf_struct_ops_desc *bpf_struct_ops_find(u32 type_id);
+const struct bpf_struct_ops_desc *bpf_struct_ops_find(struct btf *btf, u32 type_id);
void bpf_struct_ops_init(struct btf *btf, struct bpf_verifier_log *log);
bool bpf_struct_ops_get(const void *kdata);
void bpf_struct_ops_put(const void *kdata);
@@ -1684,7 +1684,7 @@ int bpf_struct_ops_test_run(struct bpf_prog *prog, const union bpf_attr *kattr,
union bpf_attr __user *uattr);
#endif
#else
-static inline const struct bpf_struct_ops_desc *bpf_struct_ops_find(u32 type_id)
+static inline const struct bpf_struct_ops_desc *bpf_struct_ops_find(struct btf *btf, u32 type_id)
{
return NULL;
}
diff --git a/kernel/bpf/bpf_struct_ops.c b/kernel/bpf/bpf_struct_ops.c
index a0291877a792..4ba6181ed1c4 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/bpf_struct_ops.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/bpf_struct_ops.c
@@ -221,11 +221,11 @@ void bpf_struct_ops_init(struct btf *btf, struct bpf_verifier_log *log)
extern struct btf *btf_vmlinux;
static const struct bpf_struct_ops_desc *
-bpf_struct_ops_find_value(u32 value_id)
+bpf_struct_ops_find_value(struct btf *btf, u32 value_id)
{
unsigned int i;
- if (!value_id || !btf_vmlinux)
+ if (!value_id || !btf)
return NULL;
for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(bpf_struct_ops); i++) {
@@ -236,11 +236,12 @@ bpf_struct_ops_find_value(u32 value_id)
return NULL;
}
-const struct bpf_struct_ops_desc *bpf_struct_ops_find(u32 type_id)
+const struct bpf_struct_ops_desc *
+bpf_struct_ops_find(struct btf *btf, u32 type_id)
{
unsigned int i;
- if (!type_id || !btf_vmlinux)
+ if (!type_id || !btf)
return NULL;
for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(bpf_struct_ops); i++) {
@@ -676,7 +677,7 @@ static struct bpf_map *bpf_struct_ops_map_alloc(union bpf_attr *attr)
struct bpf_map *map;
int ret;
- st_ops_desc = bpf_struct_ops_find_value(attr->btf_vmlinux_value_type_id);
+ st_ops_desc = bpf_struct_ops_find_value(btf_vmlinux, attr->btf_vmlinux_value_type_id);
if (!st_ops_desc)
return ERR_PTR(-ENOTSUPP);
diff --git a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
index 290e3a7ee72f..bdd166cab977 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
@@ -20094,7 +20094,7 @@ static int check_struct_ops_btf_id(struct bpf_verifier_env *env)
}
btf_id = prog->aux->attach_btf_id;
- st_ops_desc = bpf_struct_ops_find(btf_id);
+ st_ops_desc = bpf_struct_ops_find(btf_vmlinux, btf_id);
if (!st_ops_desc) {
verbose(env, "attach_btf_id %u is not a supported struct\n",
btf_id);
--
2.34.1
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-11-01 20:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-11-01 20:45 [PATCH bpf-next v9 00/12] Registrating struct_ops types from modules thinker.li
2023-11-01 20:45 ` [PATCH bpf-next v9 01/12] bpf: refactory struct_ops type initialization to a function thinker.li
2023-11-01 20:45 ` [PATCH bpf-next v9 02/12] bpf: get type information with BPF_ID_LIST thinker.li
2023-11-01 20:45 ` [PATCH bpf-next v9 03/12] bpf, net: introduce bpf_struct_ops_desc thinker.li
2023-11-01 20:45 ` [PATCH bpf-next v9 04/12] bpf: add struct_ops_tab to btf thinker.li
2023-11-01 20:45 ` thinker.li [this message]
2023-11-01 20:45 ` [PATCH bpf-next v9 06/12] bpf: hold module for bpf_struct_ops_map thinker.li
2023-11-01 20:45 ` [PATCH bpf-next v9 07/12] bpf: validate value_type thinker.li
2023-11-01 20:45 ` [PATCH bpf-next v9 08/12] bpf: pass attached BTF to the bpf_struct_ops subsystem thinker.li
2023-11-01 20:45 ` [PATCH bpf-next v9 09/12] bpf, net: switch to dynamic registration thinker.li
2023-11-02 10:23 ` kernel test robot
2023-11-03 5:57 ` kernel test robot
2023-11-01 20:45 ` [PATCH bpf-next v9 10/12] libbpf: Find correct module BTFs for struct_ops maps and progs thinker.li
2023-11-01 20:45 ` [PATCH bpf-next v9 11/12] bpf: export btf_ctx_access to modules thinker.li
2023-11-01 20:45 ` [PATCH bpf-next v9 12/12] selftests/bpf: test case for register_bpf_struct_ops() thinker.li
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20231101204519.677870-6-thinker.li@gmail.com \
--to=thinker.li@gmail.com \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=drosen@google.com \
--cc=kernel-team@meta.com \
--cc=kuifeng@meta.com \
--cc=martin.lau@linux.dev \
--cc=sinquersw@gmail.com \
--cc=song@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox